Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Hynes and Orthodox Jews: Role at Issue

This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996.
To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them.

Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems.
Please send reports of such problems to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

The delicate balance between being a politician and being a prosecutor has been most evident in District Attorney Charles J. Hynes's dealings with Brooklyn's Orthodox Jewish population.

"He has seen to it that a constituency that had been excluded from the process was brought into the mainstream," said Lew Fidler, Mr. Hynes's campaign manager in 1989 whose work with Orthodox Jews in Brooklyn helped Mr. Hynes carry those neighborhoods in the Democratic primary against Assemblyman Daniel L. Feldman.

Others, from former Brooklyn prosecutors to residents of the borough's black neighborhoods, have charged that Mr. Hynes has given preferential treatment to the Hasidim in Crown Heights and the Orthodox Jewish residents of Borough Park and Williamsburg, and they cite several instances.

One is the role of Charles Posner, a top deputy district attorney who serves as an adviser to Mr. Hynes on Jewish affairs. Mr. Posner is also president of the Council of Jewish Organizations of Flatbush. Ethical guidelines adopted by the New York State District Attorneys Association bar any assistant district attorney from serving as an official of a political committee, club or organization.

The critics also cite Mr. Hynes's decision not to remove himself from an arson investigation in which the name of Rabbi Bernard Froelich of Borough Park had surfaced. The investigation, which included the convening of a grand jury in 1989 by District Attorney Elizabeth Holtzman, ultimately resulted in no indictments after Mr. Hynes succeeded her in 1990. Rabbi Froelich serves on Mr. Hynes's neighborhood advisory panel.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

Mr. Hynes, in a statement issued by his office, said "no credible evidence was developed" to "substantiate allegations that Rabbi Froelich was involved in wrongdoing." The statement said Mr. Hynes "would have immediately referred the matter to a special district attorney" if legally sufficient evidence had turned up.

The case of Shai Fhima, the Jewish boy whose parents said he was kidnapped by an ultra-Orthodox Brooklyn rabbi, has also brought scrutiny. The parents, who are not Orthodox, have accused the District Attorney of political handling of the case, and a judge recently rejected the plea agreement Mr. Hynes had reached with the rabbi that would have imposed only probation and community service.

Finally, there is the case of Augustine Hazim, a Puerto Rican man who the police said was beaten in Borough Park by a group of Orthodox Jews after his motorcycle had come close to striking a child on the street last summer. It took seven months for the District Attorney's office to conduct a lineup, according to police officials and Mr. Hazim's lawyer. The District Attorney's office told Mr. Hazim that a witness had developed a "memory lapse" and only one man was ever arrested and indicted.

"The appearance clearly is that the District Attorney stalled to appease the Hasidic community," said Steve Louros, Mr. Hazim's lawyer. Prosecutors did not comment since the case is still active.

Mr. Hynes declined to be interviewed on the question of his relationship with Orthodox Jews. In a statement he said, "I am pledged to guarantee equal justice under the law for all persons in Brooklyn and I am a man of my word."

A version of this article appears in print on May 30, 1994, on Page 1001018 of the National edition with the headline: Hynes and Orthodox Jews: Role at Issue. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe